Remember when Herman Cain told the 99% to blame themselves?
Now he blames Rick Perry for his problem. (Adam Hunger/Reuters)
More blame game from Cain:
Herman Cain on Wednesday accused the campaign of Rick Perry of being behind the allegations that he had sexually harassed women, charges that have consumed Mr. Cain’s presidential bid in recent days, particularly as more accounts that raise questions about his behavior emerge.
Obviously, the most absurd aspect of Herman Cain's attempt to blame the Perry campaign for sexual harassment allegations made against him in the 1990s is that in the 1990s Rick Perry probably didn't know Herman Cain's name. But let's cut him some slack and assume he means to blame the Perry camp for making the allegations an issue. Here's his argument:
Mr. Cain, in an article published by Forbes on Wednesday afternoon, accused Curt Anderson — an aide with Mr. Cain’s 2004 Senate campaign in Georgia and now an adviser to Mr. Perry — of being the source. Mr. Cain recalled telling Mr. Anderson about the harassment charges in 2003.
“It was a typical campaign conversation,” Mr. Cain told Forbes. “I told him that there was only one case, one set of charges, one woman while I was at the National Restaurant Association. Those charges were baseless, but I thought he needed to know about them. I don’t recall anyone else being in the room when I told him.”
First ... only one case? Ahem. We know that's not correct. So Cain by his own admission was not telling the truth to Anderson.
Second, on Monday wasn't Herman Cain professing ignorance about the whole thing and saying he hadn't thought about it in 12 years and that he couldn't remember anything about it? Yet now he says that he thought it was an important enough issue that he remembers talking about it to an aide in 2003 for a 2004 campaign that nobody remembers?
Third, while Politico's original article about the allegations did reference a Cain staffer who said Cain had told him (or her) about the allegations, Politico's report also said that Cain had spoken with the staffer this year.
Cain, who has been married to his wife Gloria for 43 years, did tell at least one campaign staffer this year about the possibility that claims of sexual harassment could surface, according to the aide. Cain, this person said, described a case in which he fired an employee in 1990s and the woman alleged sexual misconduct or harassment. Cain told the campaign staffer he had won the case and that the woman had paid his legal fees. The aide had no further details.
And according to that same report, it was actually a member of the National Restaurant Association's board that identified Cain's first accuser.
The first woman was identified to POLITICO by a former association board member, and her identity was confirmed by two additional sources.
And the second woman was confirmed by someone close to the association, not another presidential campaign.
The second woman’s identity was confirmed by a source familiar with the association.
None of this proves Anderson wasn't a source (although he denies it), but it is clear that whether or not he spoke to Politico, Politico had plenty of sources outside of Anderson.
And that brings me back to the original point I made here: there would not be a story in the first place if the accusations had never been made in the first place, way back in 1999. And given that ...
- Each of the accusers received settlements in 1999;
- Herman Cain also left the National Restaurant Association in 1999, shortly those settlements were reached; and
- there are more women coming forward
... it seems likely that the accusations had merit. So whether or not Rick Perry is trying to capitalize on Herman Cain's problems, these problems nonetheless belong to Herman Cain and Herman Cain alone.
8:04 AM PT: Ari Berman points out:
If Perry camp did leak Cain news, it would be first thing they've successfully done this campaign